Bioconversion of knot rejects from a sulphite pulp mill to ethanol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knot rejects obtained from pulp screening after sulphite pulping are difficult to dewater, which makes landfilling expensive and burning inefficient. The rejects were found to contain up to 50% cellulose, which is very susceptible to enzymatic hydrolysis to glucose. Knot rejects were hydrolyzed at 20% consistency in a laboratory peg mixer with cellulase enzyme. The thick slurry was liquefied within the first hour of mixing and resulted in a glucose concentration of over 100 g/L after 24 hours of reaction. This solution was fermented by yeast to give an ethanol concentration of over 5%. The laboratory results were confirmed at pilot scale with a mortar mixer (high consistency) or stirred tank reactor (medium consistency) at the 400 L and 6000 L scales, respectively. It was found that washing the knots with ammonia resulted in increased glucose conversion. Enzyme costs could be lowered by separating the enzyme from the hydrolyzed sugars by membrane ultrafiltration and recycling the enzyme to the subsequent batch of substrate. The combination of high-consistency hydrolysis and enzyme recycling minimizes capital investment, energy requirements, and enzyme costs, which are significant factors in the overall economic viability of cellulose conversion to ethanol.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".